Tanz

The same reason they can't stop anyone in their own countries. The underlying problem is the citizens not bold and intelligent enough to take proper action. Putin is no fool, he managed to climb up the ranks of the KGB and manage a country that is riddled with gangsters. He had to be the #1 gangster to pull that off. I don't think he has anyone to challenge him, and from the looks of it, they seem unified in their country. Anyone that contested against them in any sort of power is probably either dead or in jail.

I'd be interested in a documentary following a few trans people in everyday life and seeing how society treats them. I think one of the many problems the right have with trans they don't come across them to understand them.

Walls are too expensive. It would be easier to use some kind of heat mapping imaging, lidar or something along those lines

Yes, it is possible, but it is extremely rare because most people do not have the physiology to be sensitive enough to receive the information. Even people that have access to psychedelics do not all become fully realized.

Yes, as is anything under the realm of existence, including even inorganic matter.

Except for puppies, cute children, and gorgeous women, someone from royal blood, most people worldwide have to earn respect. I have had women reject me and tell me to my face I'm too short for them. My feelings were hurt initially, but expecting them to give me a chance would be unreasonable. Nonetheless, its good to have a conversation on treating trans people fairly but we have to be real here, they aren't going to cast a trans Wonder Woman to make trans people feel better. Someone like Gal Gadot will make a room stop and look at her with awe, that's why they cast her as Wonder Woman.

Which exclusions are you talking about? In things like college admissions, race and gender both exclude one group and include another while overlooking academic performance. If you solely focus on academic performance, then you exclude another group. When it comes to these things, as with just about everything, things are not so black and white.

For the most part, most people agree Trans women should not compete against women in sports, by allowing them to do so ironically alienates biological women from striving in their sport. Some women feel insecure with a trans woman is in the bathroom with them. Should we ignore how they feel because a trans person feels they are being discriminated against? As a man, if a trans man is in the bathroom with even a beautiful woman or me, I would not at all feel uncomfortable. An obvious solution would be to have three bathrooms. One for men, one for women, and the other a neutral one. On the other hand, imagine the cost it would take on taxpayers in public places and businesses if we added bathrooms wherever there are bathrooms inside buildings. Trans account for about maybe 1% of the population. If the effort is given to that population, what about other minorities that perhaps deserve more attention, such as indigenous ones? I have plenty of gay friends, but I don't come across any trans people in my life, except when I go shopping in the stores and I see one working. People want to change overnight, but it takes time for these things; ultimately, it's all about personal exposure. It is difficult for most people, and it's unreasonable to expect others to sympathize with your suffering because they also suffer in different ways. They are making the trans issue a BIG issue because they are trying to distract people from more significant problems. This allows them to not work on actual cases that the majority face in their lives.

If they create a form of socialism, then it will be harder for an individual to acquire wealth and make a difference. Democracy will he harder because the wealthy will have less competition. If you keep things the same, then there will be a big gap between rich and poor this will and has undermined democracy. These problems are rooted beyond systems that come from man, rather something more fundamental in creation. All you have to do is walk down the street and count how many good-looking women and men you see.

The older people get, the less they want change to happen. It's easy to fall into nostalgia. Also, once you lived long enough, and worked hard, it's easy to get cynical when you hear other people complaining about things. I think people leaning more right than the left is a method both parties are trying to do in order to balance things out. Even if that is not the case, the side making more money are the people with a university degree and leans left; power corrupts and the corruption on the left is greater because there is more access to money. Before all that big oil, the automobile industry and other commodities have been a source of the world's wealth until the dot com boom in the 90s started to slowly shift the tide. Now technology and data is the new oil.

Some of the shareholders are part of larger groups of people that invest in their companies, and then in turn, they invest in companies like Twitter. The fiduciary responsibility is to make money for their clients. If they don't take the sale while they can, their clients will lose money in other things, and their financial institution will have broken their #1 rule. Always make money for your clients when you can. This is a big reason why companies lobby and bring in politicians that will do policies that favor their companies. We live in a dirty world, and it's not so cut and dry. However, if you think Elon Musk is "evil" or "bad", those people that allowed him to take over the company are at least as bad as him or even worst because they act anonymously. Lawyers get hired by miserable people, and their professional and moral professional responsibility is to help their clients win, even if they did the crime. If they do not defend their clients, the whole profession collapses, and no one would ever hire lawyers for anything; the economy would be jeopardized because the lawyer's responsibility is to protect rich people. The entire ecosystem creates medicine, better cars, and whatever shit makes people's lives better. The ethical thing for a lawyer is not to work for big firms and help the little guy, but then they would make less money, and with less money, they would have less financial power to make a difference or to donate to a cause they believe in. However, if you defend a wealthy pedophile, you can provide clean water for 500,000 people. That, in turn, can save more children compared to the 100s of kids molested by that sick, rich mother fucker. The same logic is used in medicine with animals getting tortured. All our hands in covered in blood one way or the other. In and Out Burger only has outlets in the west coast; they make significantly less money than macdonalds and yet everyone dumps money in In and Out, making them worth more than Macdonalds. Obviously that's not the reality, but if we were to use the analogy, that would happen. Tesla sells 1 million cars worldwide, Toyota sells 12 million, yet Tesla is worth more; it makes no sense, but that's the reality. In fact, Tesla is worth more than BMW, Mercedes, Ford, they are the most valuable auto manufacturer in the world, and it's not based on logic or reality, but rather speculation.

Not at all; they have users, lots of them, that's worth more than the actual income they earn from ads. Even if they made a loss every year, they are mining so much valuable data, magnitudes more than the company is worth. He gave an extreme highball offer based on the metrics we understand from what they tell us in revenue. Still, the data they acquire daily can produce valuable AI technology, for example. The shareholders knew the stock market would tank, so they sold the company while it was worth more. They got a good deal and now are sitting on so much cash. Musk got what he wanted: control over a platform he loves and probably access to data that could make it more than he paid for the company in the next several years. They would not have sold to him if they were romantic over their morals and kept the company because of its influence over such a broad audience. I am unsure if Musk believes in what he says about free speech, but I am sure he bought the company based on how much money he can make later on. He may be many things, but he's no fool when it comes to making money. The liberals that claim to hate him so much bought tons of Tesla stocks. Tesla is valued much higher than automobile companies that produce 10x per year. In other words, Tesla is overvalued but his ability to sell people and believe in him is astounding. It's like if someone convinces that in and out burger is so valuable that it becomes more valuable than Macdonalds, which have outlets worldwide.

It wasn't "let." The shareholders sold it to him at an insane price. When he tried to back out of the deal they chased him down and forced him to buy it in court. They could not reject the money, every one of them. If they really believed in their platform, they would not have sold. All the money people in silicon valley are libertarians; money is their real ideology. The employees who don't have any power at all are liberal. Musk gets his way because people are greedy They get paid incredibly well that's why.

Definitely lack of self-love comes in all shapes and sizes in every conceivable way.

Teachers can only help you a fraction of the way, maybe 5 or 10 percent. Maybe Adyashanti has taken psychedelics but is too scared of being judged, for it might alienate his zen community. I find him one of the better teachers on the list; even then, they can only help you so far compared to the following teachers. We are talking about the difference between masterbators(teachers) vs. an actual vagina (God in infinate incarnation)

Its probably better to assume this is an isolated case and not associate this with race, sexuality, political ideology, or group ideology.

Painfully I think he will get away without anything, and his base will rally even harder. The best thing the democrats can do is find someone like Obama or even 50% but they can't seem to find anyone, so they have to resort to attacking Trump. The DNC is paying hard for their mistake of sabotaging Bernie Sanders.

People like Trump will take advantage of overlooked groups as long as the left doesn't acknowledge its failures and the shadows of society that get outsourced to chaos. Andrew Tate is another one that takes advantage. Implementing Universal Healthcare and funding social support for broken families and mental health will be a good start.

@MarkKol If any of the social media companies do something egregious, then the government can hold them accountable but if tiktok does something egregious, there isn't anything the American government can do to them other than ban them. TikTok has the power to threaten democracy, it can incite violence, misinformation etc.. Will they do that? No one knows but it's within their power or a heavily followed personality to do that. Banning TikTok would be a preventative measure.

It didn't, but the failure is not acting out of compassion and love when the left calls itself the kind, loving side. True love requires sacrifice; it requires patients; it requires time, and money. If the shooter were my child, I would take responsibility for it by acknowledging my failure killed my child and 6 others. I would not blame the problem on the gun, the school, or the ideology of that school. On the side of the left, why isn't there funding for therapists for trans people? Couldn't we spend 300 million on therapists for trans around the entire country? We just sent 100 billion overseas to another country. If the shooter had just made at least one friend or one ear for them to be heard, then the act of violence could have been prevented. The film The Joker was so brilliant because, as an audience member, you hope there could be at least one caring individual to embrace Arthur. Still, he had no one, and when the character finally broke and decided to take things into his own hands, he took society down with him.

@Pure Imagination I grew up as a minority, I was very well aware every time a minority did something bad that, it would lead to a particular perception from the public that is incorrect. It's just human nature. Taking guns away or limiting them is undoubtedly a solution, but at the same time, it could lead to resentment. In these situations, rather than projecting our anxiety and frustrations on someone else on the left or right, it's better to look inside and admit our societal failures. This person didn't have a loving enough environment, so they didn't have the compassion and common sense not to harm people. The trans community failed to create a safe space for these individuals to work out society's angst against them. The left has no problem funding a war while not funding things that can catch these types of people that fall thru the cracks. If the left deems themselves more compassionate, their responsibility is much higher than those on the right who care about individual responsibility. This problem is everyone's problem and a failure on our part not to build loving, compassionate communities. These shootings are the backlash of a cold society. Marjorie Taylor Greene might be part of the problem, but she exists because we aren't doing enough. Removing guns is a solution, but the real solution requires much more love, energy, and personal responsibility. Even if we remove the gun from that person, they are still miserable, depressed, and suicidal. How do we make sure those things don't happen? I have enough faith in people to believe that people will randomly look for a trans person to assault because of a silly tweet.

Well, if the left were intellectually honest, the fact that the shooter is trans makes it as much of their problem as the right, who is pro-gun. This horrible event is a massive loss to all American people. Left or Right. Blaming the right to be transphobic for the shooting is irresponsible. Or blaming old fashion Christian values as an excuse for violence also isn't fair. I've been a victim of hate crimes before; I don't go around hating the race of the group that hated on me. The solution to reduce or end such horrendous crimes will take a lot of money and time to resolve because it will require people to invest in family and communities, something both left and right fail miserabily on.

@Blackhawk China removed religion when the ccp took over; it was a horrible idea because if you have been to Taiwan and China, you can see a noticeable difference between the mannerisms of Taiwanese and Chinese people. The Taiwanese are polite and a warmer, more outgoing version of what you can experience in Japan, while in China, people will walk right by a pedestrian that got hit by a car. Before the communist party took over, Buddhism and Confucianism were a centralized part of their culture.

It sounds like it makes sense, but inversely, if fewer cars were sold, more manufacturers would build cars to last longer. Toyota sales have dropped over the years because buyers' new car cycles have reduced because of low-interest rates; this disadvantages Toyota because they update their cars over a more extended period and focus on reliability rather than putting in the latest and greatest. Having bullet trains is also something America needs to work on. Theoretically, by pushing consumption, evolution progresses faster, but at the same time, the shadow part of capitalism slows down the growth of technology that could become better. Very much like Tesla almost going bankrupt multiple times because of lobbying until Toyota decided to bankroll them. Ironically, there is a lobby for EVs today, and Hydrogen technology is being stifled. According to an engineer I spoke to, if hydrogen progresses further into the future, someday, it may be possible for people to get fuel from water from the faucet or rainwater. They now have very large, sophisticated machines that convert water into liquid hydrogen gas. Imagine if they were to shrink it to the size of a diesel generator. Energy would be free. If we created a better system to exist, I think people would passionately work on solutions that make people's lives better. As of now, being greedy creates demand in the wrong ways. As of now, greed certainly seems like the best method to incentivize progress, but I am interested to see what can be done differently. It would be cool to pilot study a population of a few hundred thousand people to construct society differently. Intrinsic motivation is more effective for individual success, but there hasn't been any study or attempt to create it for a sizable population.

@Leo Gura That is certainly so, I wouldn't deny any of that. But at the same time, humans have something called an imagination, which lends to excessive greed and craving. Culturally we find it difficult to talk about these things and often deny their existence for fear of feeling uncomfortable. Like climate change deniers, EV-crazed people fall under the same biases as those they judge. A way to reduce suffering would be to buy a car every ten or even 20 years instead of buying 4 or 5 of them every ten years would be better for the environment, but that isn't a conversation that is had because it would make less money and be worse for the economy.